How did Apollo deal with the Van Allen radiation belts ?


One of the most hotly contested procedures during the Apollo missions was how NASA dealt with the issue of Van Allen belts, the naturally-occurring belts of radiation that’s suround the earth both on the journey to the moon and also returning from it. To some this just proves the point that NASA never went to the moon because they contest that if the crew went through the Van Allen belts they would have received a lethal dose of radiation and died during or shortly afterwards but as we know that didn’t happen so how did NASA achieve this. Mention the word “radiation” and most people think of x-ray,s the atom bomb Hiroshima, Chernobyl and therefore associated with bad things. Yes, you do need thick lead shielding to protect against high-intensity x-rays but the radiation in the Van Allen belts is not x-rays, it’s charged particles. There are two main types of radiation the first is electromagnetic waves this covers everything from radio waves through microwaves, infrared which we feel is heat, visible light on through ultraviolet light onto x-rays to gamma rays, that is the electromagnetic spectrum. The second type of radiation is charged particles, these are the component parts of atoms such as protons, neutrons and electrons which had been broken apart by nuclear reactions or extreme heat in the Sun. These particles flow out from the Sun as the solar wind and because they have a positive or negative electric charge they react with the Earth’s magnetic field. Some are attracted to the north and south poles where they enter the atmosphere and react with the air to create the northern and southern lights others are captured into the bands of magnetic fields around the earth where they form the Van Allen belts. These consist of an inner and outer belt and a temporary third belt which appears when the Sun has large solar flares. These bands extend from between 1000 and 60,000 miles above the earth surface with the most active areas centered around the equatorial area of the earth but thin out near the poles. This type of charge particle radiation is also known as ionizing radiation which means that it has enough energy to knock electrons from atoms or molecules that make up spacecraft and the crew inside, which can cause tissue damage if there is a high enough exposure for long enough. The main types of ionizing particles in the Van Allen belts are high-energy protons and electrons. The protons can be stopped by light materials such as the aluminium skin of craft and also the epoxy resin Heat shield. Electrons which are also known as beta particles can penetrate several inches into living tissue but because they’re very small they don’t tend to do much damage, they can also be blocked by materials like polyethylene which contain a lot of hydrogen. The hydrogen atoms are very light and absorb the beta particles as well as the fibrous insulation material that was fitted between the inner and outer hulls of command module should also have been a good shoot against them. One problem is that when beta particles interact with large atoms like late they give off secondary x-rays and this is called the bremsstrahlung effect, so the thick lead shielding but some people think is needed to protect the crew against x-rays would ironically make the problem worse by creating more xrays whereas the lighter metals like stainless steel and aluminium of command module would create less x-rays and even then some of the x-rays would be absorbed by the inner hull. So whilst we can shield against the radiation to a degree provided it’s not too strong, there are other things have been NASA engineers and the mission planners knew about and one of these was where the thickest and most lethal parts of Van Allen belts were and also how the human body reacts to radiation. The effects of radiation are cumulative which means the longer exposed to it the more damage it causes. Within reason a short exposure to high levels of radiation is better tolerated by the body as it has time to repair the damage afterwards. Long exposures to low levels of radiation caused more problems because the body has to try and repair itself and contend with a continual damage while it’s doing so. If you spent an extended period within the Van Allen belts then the effects would be lethal but the Apollo Crews only spent about six hours in total. around three and a half hours going two and a half hours returning several days later, effectively to short bursts separated by a rest period. More importantly the course which each of the Apollo craft took avoided the most lethal parts of the inner belt completely and they only went through the thinnest part of the outer belt. All the astronauts wore dosimeters to measure their personal radiation exposure levels during the flight and reported results back to NASA at regular intervals. In total the amount of radiation at the Apollo Crews received during their flights to and from the moon from high-energy protons electrons and x-rays from the bremsstrahlung effect was much less than that of the yearly allowed dose for someone working the nuclear industry and regularly dealing with radioactive materials. In the end a simple answer to why Van Allen radiation belts were not the killer issue that some people think it was and how the Apollo missions cut a radiation exposure from the cruise to between just 1% and 5% of what it could have been is because the Apollo missions didn’t need to go straight through the Van Allen belts is because they basically flew around the most deadly areas and we’re not in the less dangerous areas for long enough for it to be a showstopper. This remains true today as it was for any future missions, why go through it, when you can just go around it. Thanks for watching and I hope you found it interesting informative if you did let me know in comments below and as always please subscribe, rate and share. We also have other videos you may find interesting on the click more videos link above now showing. So it’s goodbye for me and I hope you drop by again soon 🙂

100 thoughts on “How did Apollo deal with the Van Allen radiation belts ?

  • Moon hoax proponents would know best that the Van Allen belts would kill them. Hey because I'm sure they all flew through them themselves. They need to stop making claims to an area that they cant get to. So damn ridiculous.

  • Mmhhh…I've seen two clips from NASA themselves; one where they say they still haven't found a way to get astronauts safely through the Van Allen Belt, the other saying that they've lost the technology to do it safely. How does that work? Is it down the back of the sofa with the VHS remote?

  • THEY DID GO TO THE MOON. Most of the astronauts aged prematurely and died of rare heart conditions. But the radiation dose was limited as they traveled through the belts for only a short time. They were also radiated in open space

  • Ignorant and Stupid and… may be Paid
    None stepped on the Moon because None reached it, again because None has gone through the Van Allen Belts
    And for All believers: go do a PHD thesis in this HOAX and may be You'll Gain a Grain of Brain

  • Fantastic and easily understood explanation of a very complicated subject – well done and thank you! I've shared this video on my Apollo 11 Happened page at: Minds.com: https://www.minds.com/apollo11happened and on my Twitter account: https://twitter.com/apollo11wasreal

  • What utter rubbish this guy is spouting! It is documented that some astronauts weren't aware they went through the belt! Or even where the belt was!

  • Go and ask the guy if you can fly through the belt which only takes a few hours. Ask James van Allen. What rubbish.

  • What is the level of Gamma radiation ( in micro Sv/hr) at 100 km from the earth?
    And also 1000 km from the earth?

  • There is good documentary " The Dark Side of the Moon". See and most your questions regarding moon landing will be answered. Space shuttle had a major re-entry heat issue which was solved by silicon shield otherwise the astronauts would have been fried. How was the heat issue solved by the rocket of 70's which outside surface was metal?

  • Apollo dealt quite simply with the radiation in the Van Allen belts. They didn’t go through them because all of Apollo was faked. NASA fakes space even now. The space station is faked there are so many clips of supposed “astronauts” with guy ropes on them to look like they are floating in space. There are numerous supposed “space walks” that show air bubbles because the weightless footage is filmed in the giant water tank. It’s all fake, wake up people, we have been lied to for decades.

  • Informative. Until now I thought the Van Allen's belts were used to keep the good Professor's trousers up.

  • Ignore this comment as this is a personal msg for someone

    Dont hate yourself because of that. It was just a question.

    I didnt play with your desires. I really had no idea about whats the truth about that.. Im not even sure if my theories are correct. I understand what you were thinking, its just that you responded by your pride again..cuz you felt hurt by what u were thinking even if you still havent confirmed if its true or not.

    You always have new thoughts that are all from ur mind. But dont hate urself for that.

    I understand that our connection is really confusing and unclear right now. Its easy to jump into conclusions without even knowing my side.

  • Longest you research flat earth, the more you become flat earther. And that is a fact. I'm not saying that i'm one. No hate (and flat eart society is controled oposition)

  • A very good and convincing presentation sir, but am i hearing nasa complaining about it today? 50 years on, if you could enlighten me on this please as am definitely interested about the van allen belt, thank you, and keepitup, cheers …

  • Because of Lucerferian scumbags like this retarded POS deceivers of hell, NEVER did the mk ultra mind control astronuts go anywhere.

  • I remember when I was a kid I did a science project on the different amounts of trace radiation from kinds of fruit. Nobody could believe that anything they’d ever ate could be radioactive and I got a bad grade.

  • By the lowest possible standards they would have gotten no less than 130 REM going to the moon. And that would cause a lot of problems. Calculations were done by astrophysicist Jarrah White.

  • Well…NASA didn't deal with it at all. They didn't even plan for it lol. You globetardz just repeat bad information given to you in the name of science. But this is propaganda!!! Stop believing the space nonsense. Earth is flat n stationary with the heavens above moving. Not us!!

  • So we're just going to pretend the astronauts of today just recently started they cant go through it🙄 how does this work?

  • They didn't have to deal with them because they did not go. Please stop here PS no stars, different shadows, number rocks, we never went back, we can't go though them now and finally all 900 hour of footage was erase. If you believe we went to the moon, you probably believe Trump won the electoral college. In other you are a FUCKING IDIOT

  • This is a current video made and influenced by NASA and the government in response to all the current allegations by people that don't believe we landed on the moon. In order to keep you people that believe in the moon landing, currently still under mind control. If you can't see the obvious reasons why we didn't land on the moon you are under mind control. People that do not question authority without doing research are sheeple. remember this world is ruled by Satan like it says in the Bible he's the prince of this world and he's a liar and the Father of them. He wants people to believe in science and not God. That's what this moon landing shit is all about.

  • "We must solve these challenges before we can send humans through this region of space" – Nasa in reference to the Van Allen radiation belts

    https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=new+technology+will+be+required+before+humans+can+travel+through+that+region+of+intense+radiation&&view=detail&mid=02102C93187392F5A87502102C93187392F5A875&&FORM=VRDGAR
    .

  • Great video thanks Mate I did find your explanation very interesting. You’ve proved on my part we never stop learning. You’ve given me a better understanding of the types of radiation thanks.

  • You should work for NASA because they lost the technology to get through the Van Allen belts, but you seem to know everything about it. Maybe help them get to the moon.

  • Flat earthers have no legitimate observational evidence about any theory they have voiced. With all the technological support available today, you would think they might consider investigating the situation first hand. But that would disprove their own theory!

  • Well, someone had to put that mirror on the moon so we can measure the distance over time. So basically an astronaut did this. The debunking just got debunked…

  • Great vid, pretty sure theres a flerfer out there somewhere in his basement going bonkers trying to think how to debunk this, hahaha.

  • Please tell NASA, because they have publicly noted they need to solve this problem before they go to MARS! You must be Irish, give you a pint and you can really spin stories! SHORT BURSTS, What do you consider a short burst, how many minutes are a short dose!

  • The Van Allen radiation belts are a hoax. They don't exist. Never did. They were made up by the moon landing denying hoaxtards.

  • Lies Lies and More lies. Those Astronauts never left low Earth orbit till all the missing data missing from the Apollo mission is shown to the public. Why is it gone? Because they lied.
    Humans are so gullible to think they are allowed to freely leave prison planet.

  • I did not buy into this, but I have one more question; They avoided gamma and X-rays (the Van Allen Belt) when going to moon. What about when landing back where it seems they fell without any specific controller acting right rather than just by good luck that they fell in the ocean.
    It doesn't look like they took the shuttle through the earlier path as it just fell straight downwards from where it gained momentum towards the earth.

    Moreover, are you saying that the few millimeters or even centimeters thick aluminium sheets are the ones that protected them from gamma and X-rays on their way back?

    Besides, since they passed through the thermosphere and exosphere, are you saying that you can stay in the X Rays and gamma radiation, whose magnitude we know, for even 10 minutes and still live to tell the story years later, as it is now?

  • The radiation belt may or may not have been an unsolvable issue. My doubts of the moon landings were do to other issues (using a jet propulsion force to slow down and land the lander on a surface of no atmosphere with billions of years of dust covering the surface you’d think there’d have been so much fine moon dust kicked up to completely cover it in moon dust (much like off-roading buggies get covered in dirt dust. Also it would have left a pretty good blow out crater of all the dust pushed away. Yet inall the photos of the landers their gold foil coverings are perfectly clean and reflective, the unit itself is pretty dust free and most questionable are the lunar landing pads (shaped like dishes) don’t have any dust in them, you’d think they’d be filled with dust particles . There are lots of other things regarding the photos, too many to list. But a physics thing that strikes me odd is if the circling return module is traveling around the moon at 17,000 miles an hour, how miraculous was it that an object (lander) is shot straight out from the moons surface and makes a perfect hook up with an object (return module) that passing by at 17,000 miles an hour.
    Anyway in 69 i ứa 15 and i believed ít Hà happened. But now that I look back on it. I just see more things that point to it couldn’t have happened and the more it looks like a stage propaganda event to claim some victory over the Soviet’s. looking at the videos they all have a movie set look to them. The perspectives of land and horizon don’t look real. The varying angles of shadows, the sun reflection on face covers, waving flag, etc.. one more thing why is it the lunar mobile is bigger than the lander that carried it there?
    The Chinese out to send a rover to all the exact locations the US claims we landed on and see if they find any evidence of that having happened. Maybe find the moon biggie we supposedly left behind with all the lander launching based.
    I now truly believe it was a giant hoax just as 9/11 (which also defied several laws of physics) more like a Cheney/Israel (Massod) orchestrated event to go to war with Iraq. Which might explain why Cheney surrounded himself with Israeli agents (Pearl, Wolferitz, Bremen, Silverstein, and others from his 1997 article “new American century” which was about and indefinite Middle East war.
    Lies to war and raid our public treasury.
    The Greater Israel Project

  • Refer 2m:50s onwards in NASA ADMITS WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON at …. www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpPMoIv1lxI... where NASA official discusses the Van Allen Belt problem. Or, if you prefer try …. "NASA engineer admits they can’t get past the Van Allen Belts". No need for you to take my word when you can have NASA's.

  • I watxhed the moon walk in 69 and I was just a kid. The first thing I asked my dad was why were the astronauts transparent. I could see right through them.

  • Very well explained sir. Well done! Accurate & informative.

    In all seriousness, the masses need more short, concise vids like this, but on the imminent (EMF etc) radiation dangers & risks to the human body from the imminent 5G & Smart Meter technology roll-out in the UK. (Refer to the BRILLIANT Barrie Trower YouTube clips on the former issue – the TRUTH is FRIGHTENING).

    And good, simple communication on those subjects WOULD indubitably save MANY lives.

    Kind regards,
    Hector Holbrook, UK.

  • The faked Apollo 13 was the pull back, fearing over exposure would find them out.
    It's all faked scientism. Baffled by science as they say.

  • NASA says we can't pass them now, but no problem in 1969, because our technology was so much more advanced back then. Too bad we lost the technology. Sigh.

  • The issue is not crossing Allen belts, or where to cross them, but rather its about being away from the belts that protect us

  • The rotating earth is what we have all been taught, but is that true? Is it logical, are any movements or even vibrations scientifically observable on our "Tilt a Whirl" World?
    How do we fly in a fast moving atmosphere that is allegedly revolving at earth's high speed of 1,000 mph at the equator?
    How do we fly against that moving atmosphere or with that wind, or sideways to that wind?
    Or how do we land a plane on a runway that is moving away at high speed, or coming towards us at 16 miles per minute, or safely on earth moving sideways to our landing approach at 1/4 mile per second?
    Why can we not see any curve of the earth from an airplane, or a ball shape curve at the seashore?
    Planes have instruments that keep them flying level they do not descend to follow a downward curve. Planes fly in straight lines not in some alleged curve.
    On a clear day we can see much further than would be possible if the earth was a curved sphere ball.
    Navigation, artillery, missiles, snipers and pilots do not factor in for a moving curved earth. That is evidence earth is not curved or spining, but flat with a horizontal horizon. The rotating, revolving global earth is Sa'tan's deception to turn billions away from our loving Creator who designed a wonderful flat circular stationary earth under His "firmament" dome. See Genesis in God's inspired History Book for more insightful details.

  • We called them out on this so they put a DUFFIS on too explain it which makes absolutely NO SENSE AT ALL! What will the GLOBEHEADS think of next?

  • But you just talking about 2 radiation belts, oh! surprise there are 3 radiation belts the third one even bigger oh but 6 missions and nobody knew existed until 2012 give me a break.

  • Veeeeery interesting how you've taken it upon yourself to have an explanation for this knowing that you confirmed "NONE" of outer space or radiation belts…I watched an interview with the astronauts talking about those belts as if they were "CLUELESS" yet "YOU" have answers? 6 hours you say? What was the trajectory?
    With gravity being a constant you think it would've taken 6 hours?😐
    Bro…..knock it off!😂😂😆

  • Maybe they can get through the van Allan’s belt, but how can a shuttle travelling at around 17,500 mph not hit an object like natural space debris or man made debris because if it hits anything at those speeds it will be badly damaged. Maybe the shuttle can swerve out of the way or put its brakes on hahaha

  • NASA faked the moon missions! We never had the technology at that time to achieve such a feat! Whatever you do DONT TAKE THE MARK

  • They dealt with the Van Allen belts by never leaving low earth orbit and filming the landing in a studio before launch

  • Old color televisions with CRTs could generate a fair amount of x-rays if the anode voltage regulator tube was bad or missing. This would accelerate the electrons so that when they struck the front of the tube x-rays would be created as explained in the above video.

  • I tried to fly my space machine away from earth. But I had a problem. The physics of thrust stopped when the atmosphere was lost. No atmosphere , no propulsion !
    So I went back to the drawing board.
    Tried again and had identical results.
    So the question is……( I would ask this to NASA ) how can they have propulsion in a vacuum ?
    There are so many here that have physicist connections and maybe one of them smart Folk can answer this simple question.
    Please……. no u tube physicists.
    Maybe some year I might get someone to answer this question. Should be simple . But this question usually goes unanswered or ignored. EVEN BY THE SCIENTIFIC LOOKING GUY IN SMOCK . OR FOR EXAMPLE , THE TEACHER IN THESE VIDEOS HE PUTS OUT.
    I challenge your assertions sir….

  • Very interesting! Is the calculated dose per mission (from the chart @ 6:34) the total per crew or is it the dose per crew member. Summing the doses and dividing by 11 missions = 0.409 rads/mission. Assuming 1 RAD = 1 Rem, those doses are reasonably low. Comparatively, I worked as a chemistry/radiation protection technician in nuclear power plants (both military & civilian) for 20 years. My cumulative dose was 0.5 Rem.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4O5dPsu66Kw
    "Shielding will be put to the test as the vehicle cuts through the waves of radiation. Sensors aboard will record radiation levels for scientists to study. We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space."
    NASA clearly don't share your theoretical explanation, despite the fact that they were supposed to have done this several times back in the 60's & 70's?

  • Research Flat Earth …and all the Answers to every question you possibly can think of …WILL BE ANSWERED ,…
    NASA IS A LIE !

  • Ok. Why did NASA get all into this big story about them losing the technology that allowed them to get through the Van Allen belt & fly to the Moon etc?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *